From 2007 to 2018, the Sacklers paid themselves more than $4B from opioid sales.

Share this story

Earlier this month, Ars reported on a lawsuit filed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts against OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma, members of its board, and the mega-rich, secretive family behind it all, the Sacklers. The court filings were the first to allege that the Sacklers—previously known mostly for their philanthropy—were in fact directly behind the aggressive tactics that Purdue used to drive sales of its highly addictive opioid pain killer, which allegedly helped to ignite the current opioid epidemic. Those same sales tactics were found to be deceptive and fraudulent by federal prosecutors in 2007.

Further Reading

Massachusetts' allegations painted a grim image of greed and callousness on the part of the family—for example, Richard Sackler's suggestion to consider patients who became addicted to their powerful drugs "reckless criminals" to protect sales and profits. But the version of the lawsuit released didn't have the full picture. Parts of the nearly 300-page complaint were redacted at the request of Purdue and the Sacklers.

That's not the case anymore. On Monday, January 28, a Massachusetts judge ruled that the lawsuit could be released in full, and the state's attorney general's office did so on Thursday. The newly revealed portions don't dramatically change the loathsome portrait the allegations paint of the affluent family. However, there are some interesting new pieces of information, and Ars has gone ahead and plucked them out.

Here are some of the big pieces of information and allegations in the lawsuit that the Sacklers didn't want you to see. (List is followed by a gallery, where, again, highlighting represents previously redacted text):

The spoils of OxyContin allowed the Sacklers, as board members, to vote to pay themselves more than $4 billion between 2007 and 2018. Figures for individual payments during those years are sprinkled throughout the lawsuit.

Members of the family personally ordered Purdue to increase the sales force on a number of occasions.

The family was directly involved in pushing for higher—and more dangerous—doses of OxyContin.

For years, the McKinsey & Company consulting firm had worked with Purdue to come up with sales tactics. According to a redacted section, the consultants "had reported to Purdue on opportunities to increase prescriptions by convincing doctors that opioids provide 'freedom' and 'peace of mind' and give patients 'the best possible chance to live a full and active life.'"

Board meetings for the US-based company were held in exotic and luxurious places, such as Bermuda and a castle in Ireland.

Members of the Sackler family worked on a secret plan codenamed "Tango," which would have expanded Purdue's business into addiction-treatment drugs.

Purdue employees actively tried to avoid the Sacklers because of their relentless and aggressive demands

Richard Sackler allegedly sought revenge on an insurance company for dropping coverage of OxyContin amid the epidemic of abuse.

The Sacklers allegedly knew about but did not report suspected cases of diversion and abuse by doctors.

The Sacklers paid themselves more than $4 billion.

The Sacklers ordered Purdue to hire more sales staff.

Sales staff jumped from 300 to 700.

The Sacklers pushed for stronger dosages.

McKinsey suggested pitching opioids as lifestyle drugs.

Exciting locations of their board meetings.

Region Zero tracked doctors suspected of diversion or abuse.

The Sacklers were demanding bosses.

Tactics were aimed at keeping people on opioids.

Pushing for more prescriptions.

And getting patients on higher doses.

Project Tango was a secret plan to get Purdue into addiction treatment drugs.

The Sacklers considered working to get people hooked, then unhooked.

Opioid drugs are addictive.

Suggested patient flow.

Revenge.

Last, a shout-out to the noble employee at Purdue who tried to right the ship, sending this email.

For years, the McKinsey & Company consulting firm had worked with Purdue to come up with sales tactics. According to a redacted section, the consultants "had reported to Purdue on opportunities to increase prescriptions by convincing doctors that opioids provide 'freedom' and 'peace of mind' and give patients 'the best possible chance to live a full and active life.'"

and when outside parties (who should know better) are in on the scheme, it gets even worse. I'm reminded of Arthur Andersen and their "auditing" of Enron.

Can we treat these people as murderers? Because, that's what they are.

No no. There are murderers, then there is highly profitable, society corrupting, organized serial murderers that can afford advertisement, lawyers, PR campaigns, and donate. One is very acceptable to politicians and law officials, the other is not. After all, it is never wrong-doing if it is rich and wealthy. The first mistake any criminal makes is being very poor, after all.

It doesn't matter. Our system is so corrupt that the wealthy just simply buy off politicians to look the other way.

Don't forget racist. Back in the days of St. Ronnie the Golden the government was doing the Iran, Contra, Cocaine scam. When the crack epidemic hit, and was devastating black communities it was not an 'addiction' crisis it was a 'criminal' crisis. Treatment and compassion? Pfft... Zero tolerance for those welfare-sucking, crack smoking darkies, put 'em all in prison where they belong (and make a tidy profit off that too).

Of course, greed is bottomless and eventually it reached white communities, and worse! Middle-class white communities! It's a national crisis now, please won't someone think of the children!

But, as you say. These people will remain free. Some paltry fines maybe paid and the people will pick up the tab for the treatment via yet higher healthcare costs.

Just remember that polite society looked the other way as long as it could while the sackler family killed hundreds of thousands of average Americans because they donated a lot of money museums and universities:

Can we treat these people as murderers? Because, that's what they are.

Quite possibly. You have a small group of people and what looks to be a couple of smoking guns. It seems that the Sachlers where dumb enough to write some of their thinking down. And, as added bonus, these clowns are rich enough to make it worthwhile.

I don't see how RICO charges can be avoided if these allegations are proven true.

Well, you see, RICO is reserved for the "bad" street drug guys. Heck, we can fill up the jails and have a whole prison industry to make money on with the corner dealers we can arrest. It in fact wouldnt surprise me if the Sacklers had money invested in the private prison system as well. Whenever I see stuff like this it reminds me of this scene. The Sacklers are at the table right behind him acting all horrified.

Full out criminal, shitty behavior. If found guilty, these people should no longer be allowed to enjoy the privilege of living in a free society amongst us. Even that would be letting them off lightly. Pretty damning stuff here:

Members of the Sackler family worked on a secret plan codenamed "Tango," which would have expanded Purdue's business into addiction-treatment drugs.

Richard Sackler allegedly sought revenge on an insurance company for dropping coverage of OxyContin amid the epidemic of abuse.

The Sacklers allegedly knew about but did not report suspected cases of diversion and abuse by doctors.

Put them on trial for murder. NOBODY should be able to buy their way out of murder charges, especially on such a grand scale. This looks to be blatant, premeditated, murderous conduct. All in the name of making money (how much fucking money do you need?!). Oh, and spare us all the, "this was taken out of context" bullshit. Somewhere along the line these people apparently completely forgot what it means to be decent human beings.

Time to start making an example of this sort of behavior so these reckless criminals will think twice before pulling shit like this. Put them on trial and treat them like the rest of us would be who aren't swimming in a multi-billion dollar pool filled with blood money...

We have people who, for example, want to sell pharmaceutical-grade heroin over the counter, for recreational uses. Maybe they even want tax payers to fund it .. in the case of so-called "safe injection" sites.

Why is it unacceptable for the Sacklers to advance the availability of pharmaceutical-grade opiods, but fashionable for "harm reduction" safe-injection proponents to do the exact same thing? In both cases, we end up with the same result: more opiods, more opiods available to addicts, and more addicted citizens.

I only know of one area in the US that has proposed safe injection sites, and that is Seattle and its surrounding county, King County. I believe Vancouver, BC, Canada has a site up and running.

All of the safe injection sites I've read about only allow people to consume drugs on site, they don't sell the drugs there. The theory behind safe injection sites, is that it is better to have clean needles and needle collection on site, with a nurse who is monitoring who can administer an antidote, than it is to have people literally doing drugs out on the street.

I don't understand why conspiracy nuts only get boners over those theories which don't stand the rigours of 10 seconds of consideration; and *can't* be demonstrated with screeds of verifiable, court-released documentary evidence. I guess it's not an exclusive enough club when the facts are so damn apparent as to smack anyone who'd care to look vigorously about the face.

Willful and knowing development of products and business practices designed to maximise sales, with a demonstrated negligence of the human cost. Nothing short of corporate manslaughter.

It doesn't matter. Our system is so corrupt that the wealthy just simply buy off politicians to look the other way.

Don't forget racist. Back in the days of St. Ronnie the Golden the government was doing the Iran, Contra, Cocaine scam. When the crack epidemic hit, and was devastating black communities it was not an 'addiction' crisis it was a 'criminal' crisis. Treatment and compassion? Pfft... Zero tolerance for those welfare-sucking, crack smoking darkies, put 'em all in prison where they belong (and make a tidy profit off that too).

Of course, greed is bottomless and eventually it reached white communities, and worse! Middle-class white communities! It's a national crisis now, please won't someone think of the children!

But, as you say. These people will remain free. Some paltry fines maybe paid and the people will pick up the tab for the treatment via yet higher healthcare costs.

God bless America!

I'm not sure they're gonna get away with just a slap on the wrist, here. They seem to be bringing out the big guns on the lawsuit, and it sounds like the evidence is extremely strong. The laws probably won't allow seizing all the ill-gotten gains, as white collar crime, even at this scale, is punished less harshly than a guy moving a dime bag on a street corner, but the sheer scale of the operation could potentially result in serious prison time, nonetheless.

They're at least making the opening steps toward dramatic punishment. It might not happen, but I don't think that will be the fault of the police; the Sacklers will obviously have the best legal team money can buy.

Why is it that manufactures can be sued if their products cause harm but these asshats can kill with impunity?

Oh, right. I forgot.

Industry owns the legislature.

FWIW, the information coming to light here is doing so as a result of a lawsuit brought by the State of Massachusetts. The Sacklers have fought with tooth and nail to prevent public disclosure of this information and much else that is now being dragged into the sunlight.

For years, the McKinsey & Company consulting firm had worked with Purdue to come up with sales tactics. According to a redacted section, the consultants "had reported to Purdue on opportunities to increase prescriptions by convincing doctors that opioids provide 'freedom' and 'peace of mind' and give patients 'the best possible chance to live a full and active life.'"

and when outside parties (who should know better) are in on the scheme, it gets even worse. I'm reminded of Arthur Andersen and their "auditing" of Enron.

Personally I will believe anything of McKinsey. It is a company that exemplifies Oscar Wilde's dictum - it knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Just remember that polite society looked the other way as long as it could while the sackler family killed hundreds of thousands of average Americans because they donated a lot of money museums and universities: